6.

Process or Product Monitoring and Control

6.3. Univariate and Multivariate Control Charts

6.3.1. What are Control Charts?

Comparison of
univariate and
multivariate
control data

Control charts are used to routinely monitor quality. Depending on

the number of process characteristics to be monitored, there are
two basic types of control charts. The first, referred to as a
univariate control chart, is a graphical display (chart) of one
quality characteristic. The second, referred to as a multivariate
control chart, is a graphical display of a statistic that summarizes
or represents more than one quality characteristic.
Characteristics of If a single quality characteristic has been measured or computed
control charts
from a sample, the control chart shows the value of the quality
characteristic versus the sample number or versus time. In general,
the chart contains a center line that represents the mean value for
the in-control process. Two other horizontal lines, called the upper
control limit (UCL) and the lower control limit (LCL), are also
shown on the chart. These control limits are chosen so that almost
all of the data points will fall within these limits as long as the
process remains in-control. The figure below illustrates this.
Chart
demonstrating
basis of control
chart

Why control charts The control limits as pictured in the graph might be .001
"work"
probability limits. If so, and if chance causes alone were present,
the probability of a point falling above the upper limit would be
one out of a thousand, and similarly, a point falling below the
lower limit would be one out of a thousand. We would be
searching for an assignable cause if a point would fall outside

these limits. Where we put these limits will determine the risk of
undertaking such a search when in reality there is no assignable
cause for variation.
Since two out of a thousand is a very small risk, the 0.001 limits
may be said to give practical assurances that, if a point falls
outside these limits, the variation was caused be an assignable
cause. It must be noted that two out of one thousand is a purely
arbitrary number. There is no reason why it could not have been
set to one out a hundred or even larger. The decision would depend
on the amount of risk the management of the quality control
program is willing to take. In general (in the world of quality
control) it is customary to use limits that approximate the 0.002
standard.

Plus or minus "3

sigma" limits are
typical

Letting X denote the value of a process characteristic, if the system

of chance causes generates a variation in X that follows the normal
distribution, the 0.001 probability limits will be very close to the 3
limits. From normal tables we glean that the 3 in one direction
is 0.00135, or in both directions 0.0027. For normal distributions,
therefore, the 3 limits are the practical equivalent of 0.001
probability limits.
In the U.S., whether X is normally distributed or not, it is an
acceptable practice to base the control limits upon a multiple of the
standard deviation. Usually this multiple is 3 and thus the limits
are called 3-sigma limits. This term is used whether the standard
deviation is the universe or population parameter, or some estimate
thereof, or simply a "standard value" for control chart purposes. It
should be inferred from the context what standard deviation is
involved. (Note that in the U.K., statisticians generally prefer to
adhere to probability limits.)
If the underlying distribution is skewed, say in the positive
direction, the 3-sigma limit will fall short of the upper 0.001 limit,
while the lower 3-sigma limit will fall below the 0.001 limit. This
situation means that the risk of looking for assignable causes of
positive variation when none exists will be greater than one out of
a thousand. But the risk of searching for an assignable cause of
negative variation, when none exists, will be reduced. The net
result, however, will be an increase in the risk of a chance
variation beyond the control limits. How much this risk will be
increased will depend on the degree of skewness.
If variation in quality follows a Poisson distribution, for example,
for which np = .8, the risk of exceeding the upper limit by chance
would be raised by the use of 3-sigma limits from 0.001 to 0.009

and the lower limit reduces from 0.001 to 0. For a Poisson

distribution the mean and variance both equal np. Hence the upper
3-sigma limit is 0.8 + 3 sqrt(.8) = 3.48 and the lower limit = 0
(here sqrt denotes "square root"). For np = .8 the probability of
getting more than 3 successes = 0.009.
Strategies for
If a data point falls outside the control limits, we assume that the
dealing with out-of- process is probably out of control and that an investigation is
control findings
warranted to find and eliminate the cause or causes.
Does this mean that when all points fall within the limits, the
process is in control? Not necessarily. If the plot looks nonrandom, that is, if the points exhibit some form of systematic
behavior, there is still something wrong. For example, if the first
25 of 30 points fall above the center line and the last 5 fall below
the center line, we would wish to know why this is so. Statistical
methods to detect sequences or nonrandom patterns can be applied
to the interpretation of control charts. To be sure, "in control"
implies that all points are between the control limits and they form
a random pattern.